I cover the video game industry, write about gamers, and review video games.
You can follow me on Twitter and hit me up there if you have any questions or comments you'd like to chat about.
Disclosure: Many of the video games I review were provided as free review copies. This does not influence my coverage or reviews of these games.
I do not own stock in any of the companies I cover. I do not back any Kickstarter projects related to video games. I do not fund anyone in the industry on Patreon.

Stanton is a Pixar veteran. He directed A Bugs Life, Finding Nemo, and Wall-E. He worked on the screenplay for most of Pixar’s animated films, including the in-production prequel to Monsters Inc. (Monster’s University.)

If you’re like me, Pixar can do almost no wrong. So Cars wasn’t exactly their best (I haven’t seen the sequel) but by and large, when Pixar takes a swing at bat they knock it out of the park. I’m glad to see more Pixar players branching out into non-animated, more adult fare.

Burroughs was the pulp-science-fiction genius behind the Mars books that spawned John Carter (of Mars) and the classic Tarzan novels like Tarzan of the Apes. It’s neat to see old adventure stories come to life on film, even if they end up straying a long ways from the original. Certainly Tarzan has seen his fair share of film and comic adaptations.

John Carter is getting his moment in the sun now, after being long over-shadowed by his jungle-dwelling counterpart. Sure, in 2009 we got a direct-to-DVD adaptation in Princess of Mars, but the big-budget John Carter from Disney should be much better.

“John Carter is much better than you’re expecting it to be. A lot not shown in the advertising,” wrote Peter Sciretta of Slash Film soon after the premiere. “Lynn and Taylor were great. You’ll love Woola and will leave hoping they’ll make a sequel.”

Hitfix’s Drew McWeeney wrote, “I am no longer in danger of being killed for saying that I quite liked John Carter.”

Think that can be dismissed as mere fanboy chatter? A smattering of “ normal person” reactions ranged from “awesome flick” to “Ignore all the trailers and listen to me when I say JOHN CARTER was amazing and you need to go see it.”

“We made a f—ing great movie in John Carter,” the film’s star, Taylor Kitsch, said. “It’s such wasted energy if I worry about what a million people I don’t know are going to think. I’m excited for people to enjoy the journey.”

4. Four-armed aliens – the good guys, apparently – and big white ape things that Carter has to fight in an arena.

Here’s an extended scene Disney just released for the film:

As you can see, we’re dealing with a ton of CGI here, and it looks beautifully done. Space ships, desert vistas, scantily clad men and women, fifteen-foot-tall aliens, a high-stakes adventure. What more could you ask for?

5. Besides, how often do you get a $250 million dollar remake of a classic science fiction story, replete with 3D and CGI?

Chris Lee, writing in The Daily Beast, calls the film a disaster, apparently based on comments and observations of rival studios.

But Lee’s article is absurd. He’s digging a grave without a corpse, long before knowing whether or not the film will be a success. He’s wildly underestimating Disney, and completely glosses over Stanton’s success in every other project he’s been a part of. Disney has had some flops in recent years, but they’ve also put out Enchanted, The Princess and the Frog, and Tangled – three films that quite frankly restored my faith in Disney’s non-Pixar capacity to make great films.

What annoys me to no end is how quick critics are to jump all over something like John Carter. For one thing it’s deeply nerdy stuff. We have a guy dressed sort of like Conan the Barbarian (without the muscle mass) and green Martians and big fuzzy white apes in a coliseum. So let’s make fun of the nerds and spit venom at Disney because of their “huge gamble” – as though taking risks on a film that relies on old source material rather than teenage vampires is such a horrible thing, something to be laughed at.

I’ve seen several trailers for this film, and each one looks better than the last. I know the source material, even if many people don’t. And I trust the direction and writing skills of Andrew Stanton. Of course Disney is worried that their quarter-of-a-billion dollar investment will not pay out. This is a huge risk, even if it’s a well-received, critically acclaimed film. Does this make it a de facto disaster?

Only if you want page-clicks.

I’ll be at the movies next month with high hopes. But even if I’m wrong, I won’t tear down an ambitious project before it even hits theatres.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

Honestly, this movie had me at Peter Gabriel’s orchestral cover of Arcade Fire’s ‘My Body Is a Cage’ (used in the first trailer).

I don’t know know what all the kvetching is about? Frankly, I think it looks gorgeous.

And, believe me, I’d prefer not to be excited about anything Disney is putting out. More often than not, when I’m incensed about entertainment industry shenanigans, Disney is involved in some way.

But c’mon. It’s John Carter, for heaven’s sake. And with a bazillion dollars invested in production. I’ll support such an effort to propel the genre, even if I can’t stand the company that’s ultimately behind it.

I’ve been quite impressed by the trailers, myself. And this article echoes my thoughts about Andrew Stanton. His movies are smart and clever: I just don’t see him making something awful. From what I’ve read about this movie and his prior efforts I think he could be the next Speilberg.

I must reluctantly agree with some of the criticisms of this film. Regardless, I’ve waited 48 years hoping to see John Carter in any form of film. (First found the JC of Mars books as I wandered the school library in 1963.) If for no other reason, Burroughs – the creator of Tarzan, Carson of Venus, and the Pellucidar series – DESERVES a film adaptation of his John Carter of Mars series. Criticisms I’ve read that this film is somehow “derivative” of previous film space operas obviously demonstrate that critic’s ignorance of seminal sci-fi authors’ works. As today’s cyber-generation usually does not Read and is unfamiliar with classic sci-fi Written works of ERB, H.G.Wells, & Jules Verne, it’s understandable that Disney had to make some modifications in the plot to maintain the short attention spans of today’s audience.

Frankly, I prefer them to Burroughs’ original portrayal of Carter as helpless to direct his transport back to Barsoom. Also, I appreciate the degree of closure Disney provided – that Burroughs did not – by making it clear that Carter was returning to Barsoom. We old folks needed to read the next book in his series (of 11 paperbacks) to get that relief.

Scientific and astronomical criticisms directed at the factual inaccuracy of portraying Mars as something other than the cold airless desert planet it is – they ignore the best information that was available to Burroughs 100 years ago. Remember that Percival Lowell was, at that time publishing his theories of an Inhabited Mars. Lowell published his views in three books: Mars (1895), Mars and Its Canals (1906), and Mars As the Abode of Life (1908). With these writings, Lowell more than anyone else popularized the long-held belief that these markings [canals] showed that Mars sustained intelligent life forms.

This series of JC of Mars books is Classic and seminal Sci-fi that inspired Lucas, Ridley Scott, Cameron and many of the rest. Let’s see:

For those of us who own the whole JC of Mars paperback series – and carefully turn the yellowed pages- as we actually read them – Disney has done a Terrific job trying to engage the interest of today’s sci-fi fans. This film properly honors Mr. Burroughs’ genius. Most of the flaws could have been sequenced and explained better. But that would have probably required a 3 hour movie.

I am grateful for this one film and Disney’s willingness to bet big money to set the record straight – as to whom we owe so much for the original introduction of concepts and plots we sci-fi fans take for granted today. 100 years later.

Any self-respecting sci-fi fan should go see this film. Disney should not take a financial hit for showing today’s generation where their icons originated.